Editor,
On two occasions (a city meeting and the “meet the candidate” meeting), I asked the Santaquin City Manager directly about a voter pamphlet that the city would put out to address both sides of the proposed sewer plant issue. He indicated that there would be a pamphlet put out and that it would address both pros and cons of this important subject.
When the pamphlet was put out, only the pros (or city’s position) was addressed. There was no opinion to the contrary. This is a great disservice to the community and I am surprised that both the city manager and the mayor feel that they are serving the people of this community by not giving them both sides of an issue of such great importance. It appears that the City Manager and the mayor are quite willing to block any legitimate debate and will go to great lengths to move forward on their agenda.
I came into this issue with an open mind. I have come to the conclusion that the city’s position must be weak if it has to resort to dishonesty and lies to further it’s position. I intend to tell all my friends and associates about my personal experience with these elected officials and urge them to look into this matter more closely.
Jack Fetterman
Facebook
Twitter
I feel you are blaming this all on the “Mayor” and the “City Manager”. There is also CURRENT city council members that were aware of the 50 day deadline to have “their side” turned in. Filip Askerlund – who is clearly against the “MBR”, sits on the council right now, and it is the responsibility of the Council member to WORK with the mayor and city manager to ensure this does not happen.
I believe you are 100% correct, we need to look into who we place into the city council so they will do their job, and pay a little more attention to the details, such as deadlines.
According to the City Manager, the 50 day deadline was not known by the city council. This wasn’t something that came up. Everything this Mayor and City Manager and Mayor has done has been corrupt. They have spent city funds to promote this bill in violation of state law (hence, the Lt. Gov investigation of the Mayor). He awarded a sole source contract (no competitive bid) to an engineering firm with no prior experience in building these things. Something is not right about this.
There was a deadline for publishing opinions in the voter pamphlet. The anti-MBR folks missed the deadline, period. Why is this the fault of the mayor/council? Why does a certain group of citizens think that the mayor is corrupt? Where is the real proof beyond bad blood and rumors? I have seen no EVIDENCE of anything other than the council’s desire to serve the city’s best interest. Everyone has a “Close Friend” that says the mayor did something wrong, but no real evidence has come forth. This seems slanderous to a good man. I have attended the council meetings, gathered information and studied the issues without listening to the witch-hunt retoric. Whatever my opinion of the mayor or the council, I voted for what I believed was best for the city. Polls are not the place for personal feelings to spew out. Let’s get together and make this a better town and quit trying to stir the rumor mill or add to the urban myths about our city goverment.
Yes, there could have been both sides. However, the city is NOT at fault, nor is the Mayor or city manager. If those people were so opposed to the MBR don’t you think they would do their homework and see when materials had to be submitted. No instead at city council Fil tries to change the law, in which the city attorney informs him that it is a state law and can not be changed. Jack, get your facts straight, don’t blame the city, they are not at fault. For more information look at the city council minutes or call the city directly 801-754-3211
The Voter Information Packet that came in the mail to my house a week before the election had clear sections addressing “Arguments For” and “Arguments Against” both propositions that we were voting on in this election. I’m sorry Mr. Fetterman missed it; I thought it was very helpful.
Jamie, I have my facts straight. Ben Reeves told me twice that the voter pamphlet would have both sides represented. He did not inform the opposition of any deadline. The last time I talked to Ben about the matter (at the meet the candidate meeting) I heard him tell one of the candidates that he was looking into the requirements. He did not share that with the opposition.
I can’t believe the number of blind followers of this mayor! Do you really think that a man who would break Utah state laws and have the city mail out a 4 page flyer (elephant on the toilet) at city expense is really interested in getting all the facts (as opposed to the pseudo facts he wants put out) out to the people to vote? Remember, this is the man who didn’t want the people to vote on this in the first place. Most of the people of Santiquin voted against this measure and footed the cost for the 4 page letter promoting the MBR. Wake up
I find it hard to criminalize the mayor over a flyer. I liked his flyer because it was factual, not all of the flyers mailed out over this issue were factual. Mayor DeGraffenreid did not realize at the time that he shouldn’t have sent it out, but wow, four pages to inform the public on the issue at hand was not malicous nor were his intentions bad. Now if you want to discuss elected officials that have wasted city resources, we certainly could. Although, I don’t think it should be a problem any more come January.
Carolyn,
You give the mayor more credit than I do for honesty. Remember, this is a man who tried to stop the the people from voting on an issue after the Utah Supreme Court ruled they could. An important issue that Lance Wollebaek said (in the last debate)would allow the people to create a 40 year bond for a facility that would last 20 years. Why didn’t the mayor trust the people of Santiquin to make the right decision?
Additionally, this mayor pushed for a soul source contract (NO COMPETITIVE BID) with an engineering firm with no prior experience building these type of facilities (I know the city council bears some culpability here). How was the public well served by this? What was the mayor/s motive for not getting competitive bids? Was this part of an “old boys club” mentality where the mayor just liked these guys or was there something else involved? When the mayor spends his own money, he is entitled to spend it how he wishes. When he spends the peoples money, he needs to take care and spend it wisely.
Just one more dirty deed this city has done I hope people read what happened to us in the opinion section on why I’m a skeptic. That’s one dirty diaper rolled up in dishonesty and put out into the trash. Our whole neighbor hood stood against this, had a meeting with the mayor and was discard as if it was us that stunck. We all left knowing that no matter what, this mayor was going to do whatever HE wanted to do just to fit his agenda. That’s some stink if I’ve ever smelt it.
Diann, I think you have gotten to the root of the matter. We have a mayor that thinks he is above it all, including the law.
I think there may come a time when all the followers of Saint James may find their idol has clay feet.
Jack,I believe you have hit the nail on the head,The mayor of this city is not the man who his followers believe him to be.I believe he is just like most in his postion a liar and a crook! I would guess the reason he pushed for a soul source contract (NO COMPETITIVE BID) is because somewhere down the line this project will line his pockets well!!!! The sad thing is the good people of Santaquin will be the ones who will suffer because one man made this city believe that we could TRUST him. Greed from that office and a few others in this city will make Santaquin known for a city to stay away from!!!!
I am a relative newcomer (five years)to Santaquin. One of the reasons we moved here was to escape the “big city bonding for unaffordable projects dumped on the tax payers” mentality. We believed Santaquin would have been more sensible in its funding of community projects. Well, I have seen nothing to convince me of that about the new sewer project. I have seen a community denied an opportunity on voting on this project originally and then only through the action of a court were we allowed to participate on such a long range bonding issue. Even in the “big city” we were allowed to vote on expensive projects.
This whole thing has been a PR disaster. What was the rush to indebtedness for? It seems we are following the nation’s stimulus package (nearly 1 trillion dollars) because it had to be done now, only to find out it did nothing but increase the debt many times fold. The art of creating crisis to avoid logical thinking abounds even in this town. Show me the positive signs of this supposed quick recovery in the economy that the city and others are projecting. Where are they? What was the hurry?
Even friends of ours who believe in pending “gloom and doom” voted for this project. I don’t understand. I pray that I am wrong.